Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Examines identity formation in the First Bulgarian Empire, indicating a shift towards a more integrative Bulgarian identity.
This study examines the processes of identity formation in the First Bulgarian Empire (681–1018) through the lens of debates over ethnicity and statehood in the early Middle Ages. Drawing on both primary sources and modern historiography, it argues that this polity witnessed a gradual shift from a narrowly defined Bulgar identity, rooted in steppe traditions and restricted to specific social groups, towards a more integrative Bulgarian identity tied to Christian institutions and political structures. This transformation facilitated the incorporation of diverse ethnic, linguistic, and cultural communities into a shared political framework. The paper critically assesses the interplay between emic and etic perspectives, the methodological challenges of linking archaeological and textual evidence to ethnic identity, and the role of Christianization as a catalyst for cohesion. While acknowledging the fragmentary and situational nature of the sources, it underscores that the meaning of "Bulgar" and "Bulgarian" evolved over time.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Daniel Ziemann (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: